July 22, 1946

RESEARCH COUNCIL ACT

APPOINTMENT OF VICE-PRESIDENTS AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, ETC.- CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS


Mr. G. J. McILRAITH (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply) moved the second reading of and concurrence in amendments made by the senate to bill No. 154, to amend the Research Council Act.


PC

Grote Stirling

Progressive Conservative

Mr. STIRLING:

Will the parliamentary

assistant comment on the amendments?

Topic:   RESEARCH COUNCIL ACT
Subtopic:   APPOINTMENT OF VICE-PRESIDENTS AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, ETC.- CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
Permalink
LIB

George James McIlraith (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply)

Liberal

Mr. McILRAITH:

The amendments are to be found in Votes and Proceedings No. 75 of Monday, July 8. They are quite short. They do not go into the substance of the bill but rather deal with the clarification of language. The first amendment deals with section 7 of the bill, additional powers of the council, and clarifies the language to make it clear that the additional power granted the council is to carry on manufacturing of an experimental and developmental nature. It will be noted that they strike out the words "experimental

Criminal Code

and development work and manufacturing" and substitute in their place "work and manufacturing of an experimental and developmental nature." In other words, they limit the type of manufacturing that can be carried on and clarify the language in that respect.

The next amendment has to do with section 9 of the bill and is simply a matter of change in numbering the paragraphs referred to, (c),

(d), (i) and (h) so that they will read in their proper alphabetical order.

The next amendment has to do with paragraph (b) of section 4 (1) of the act. That paragraph had to do with the .council assuming control of existing companies, and the amendment brings the wording of that section into line with the wording of the section granting power to incorporate companies. It adds, after the word "companies", the following language: "incorporated under the provisions of part I of the Companies Act, 1934". It simply makes it clear that they cannot assume control of existing companies of another type. These are the only amendments.

Topic:   RESEARCH COUNCIL ACT
Subtopic:   APPOINTMENT OF VICE-PRESIDENTS AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, ETC.- CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
Permalink
PC

Howard Charles Green

Progressive Conservative

Mr. GREEN:

The official opposition concur in the amendments. As a matter of fact, the first one we suggested ourselves while the bill was under debate in this house. At least we suggested a similar amendment. I think it strengthens the bill. The other amendment that really amounts to anything at all is the fourth, and we also concur in it.

Topic:   RESEARCH COUNCIL ACT
Subtopic:   APPOINTMENT OF VICE-PRESIDENTS AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, ETC.- CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
Permalink
CCF

William Irvine

Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (C.C.F.)

Mr. IRVINE:

I am opposed to them all.

Topic:   RESEARCH COUNCIL ACT
Subtopic:   APPOINTMENT OF VICE-PRESIDENTS AND EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE, ETC.- CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
Permalink

Motion agreed to, amendments read the second time and concurred in.


GOVERNMENT COMPANIES

OPERATIONS AND FINANCING


Mr. G. J. McILRAITH (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply) moved the second reading of and concurrence in amendments made by the senate to bill No. 155, respecting the operation of government companies. He said: These amendments to bill 155 are to be found in Votes and Proceedings, No. 75 of Monday, July 8. The amendment is limited to section 10 of the bill. Section 10 deals with the contents of the annual report and provision for it to be laid before parliament. Subsection 1 as it now reads in the bill as passed by the House of Commons is as follows: Every company shall, as soon as possible after the thirty-first day of March in each year, and in any event within three months thereof, submit to the minister an annual report in such form as the minister may prescribe of its affairs and operations during the twelve-month period ending on the thirty-first day of March, and the minister shall lay the said report before parliament, if parliament is then in session or within fifteen days of the next session of parliament. The senate amendment provides for the deletion of the words "in such form as the minister may prescribe" and the addition after the word "march" of the following words: containing its financial statement and such other information as the minister may prescribe. It is an amendment in form. It clarifies the language and makes it clear that the financial statement must be included in the annual report.


PC

Howard Charles Green

Progressive Conservative

Mr. GREEN:

What type of financial statement is to be submitted by these companies? Is it the financial statement as called for under the Dominion Companies Act?

Topic:   GOVERNMENT COMPANIES
Subtopic:   OPERATIONS AND FINANCING
Sub-subtopic:   CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
Permalink
LIB

George James McIlraith (Parliamentary Assistant to the Minister of Reconstruction and Supply)

Liberal

Mr. McILRAITH:

It would be the financial statement as provided for by the Companies Act of 1934.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT COMPANIES
Subtopic:   OPERATIONS AND FINANCING
Sub-subtopic:   CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
Permalink
PC

Howard Charles Green

Progressive Conservative

Mr. GREEN:

The official opposition also concur in this amendment.

Topic:   GOVERNMENT COMPANIES
Subtopic:   OPERATIONS AND FINANCING
Sub-subtopic:   CONCURRENCE IN SENATE AMENDMENTS
Permalink

Motion agreed to, amendments read the second time and concurred in.


CRIMINAL CODE

JURORS IN CRIMINAL CASES IN SASKATCHEWAN AND ALBERTA


Right Hon. L. S. ST. LAURENT (Minister of Justice) moved the second reading of bill No. 303, to amend the criminal code.


PC

Howard Charles Green

Progressive Conservative

Mr. GREEN:

Will the minister explain this? The hon. member for Calgary West (Mr. Smith) is not here.

Mr. ST. LAURENT: I explained the purpose of this bill on the first reading thereof and discussed it afterwards with the hon. member for Calgary West. He was satisfied with the provision that was being made. This is the situation. In Saskatchewan the code provided that indictments should be tried by a jury of six persons. The government of Saskatchewan, through the attorney general, asked us to have the code amended to provide that in that province, as in most of the other provinces, trial on indictment be by a jury of twelve. That is one provision made in the bill. The other provision is to carry out an undertaking I gave the hon. member for Calgary West when my estimates were under consideration, that I would ask the house to deal at this session with the situation with respect to challenges and requests to stand aside in the selection of jurors to

Criminal Code

existed immediately before the first day of September, 1905. The Northwest Territories Act, as it existed before the first of September, 1905, gave the accused only four peremptory challenges in the selection of a jury of six persons to try even a capital case. The hon. gentleman suggested that in the trial of important oases in Alberta the de-try indictments in Alberta. There was the provision that the code would not apply in Alberta in so far as its provisions might be inconsistent with the Northwest Territories Act and amendments thereto, as the same fence should have the same number of challenges as would prevail elsewhere. He also complained that the crown had an unlimited number of stand-asides which could be exercised, and that might place an accused person in an unfair position. He was not suggesting that these requests to stand-aside were used unfairly, but they could be used unfairly to make up the kind of jury that those representing an accused person would not like to have sworn.

After the discussion of the estimates in the house, we communicated with the attorney general of Alberta, and he was quite willing to have this provision in the code eliminated, because it seemed to be more embarrassing than otherwise-that is, the provision referring to the Northwest Territories Act as it existed in 1905-provided that the number of jurors to be sworn were not increased beyond six, and provided that the number of peremptory challenges and the number of stand-asides be one-half those that could be exercised when a jury of twelve persons was being selected. I mentioned that to the hon. member for Calgary West and he was quite satisfied that that was a fair provision to make. It gives the defence in Alberta the same proportionate right in choosing a jury of six as that which exists in other provinces where the jury is composed .of twelve persons.

Hon. members will remember that when the matter was discussed while my estimates were being considered, the hon. member for Calgary West said he was not complaining of a six-man jury, but of the fact that the defence did not have the same proportionate rights with respect to a jury in Alberta which they had in the procedure which prevails in the other provinces.

It required quite a lengthy bill to carry out the provision, but I can assure the house that that is all the bill does. It increases the number of jurymen in Saskatchewan from six to twelve as requested by the government of that province. It provides, as existed heretofore, that' six jurymen instead of twelve will try indictments in Alberta, but that in their

selection there shall be one-half the number of challenges and one-half the number of stand-asides which are allowed in the selection of a panel of twelve jurors in the other provinces.

Topic:   CRIMINAL CODE
Subtopic:   JURORS IN CRIMINAL CASES IN SASKATCHEWAN AND ALBERTA
Permalink

Motion agreed to.


July 22, 1946